1 of 32 

SEC Petition Evaluation Report 

Petition SEC-00124 

Report Rev #: 0 Report Submittal Date: 08/13/2008_ 

Subject Expert(s): James Mahathy 

Site Expert(s): N/A 

Petitioner Administrative Summary 

Petition Under Evaluation 

Petition # Petition 

Type 

Petition A 

Receipt Date DOE/AWE Facility Name 

SEC-00124 83.14 August 1, 2008 Connecticut Aircraft Nuclear Engine Laboratory (CANEL) 

NIOSH-Proposed Class Definition 

The NIOSH-proposed class includes all employees of DOE, its predecessor agencies, and DOE contractors or 

subcontractors who worked at the Connecticut Aircraft Nuclear Engine Laboratory in Middletown, 

Connecticut, from January 1, 1958 through December 31, 1965, for a number of work days aggregating at least 

250 work days, occurring either solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the 

parameters established for one or more other classes of employees in the SEC.

Related Petition Summary Information 

SEC Petition Tracking #(s) Petition Type DOE/AWE Facility Name Petition Status 

NONE 

Related Evaluation Report Information 

Report Title DOE/AWE Facility Name 

 

ORAU Lead Technical Evaluator: James Mahathy ORAU Review Completed By: Michael S. Kubiak

Peer Review Completed By: [Signature on file] 08/13/2008 

S. E. Glover Date 

SEC Petition Evaluation Reviewed By: [Signature on file] 08/14/2008 

J. W. Neton Date 

SEC Evaluation Approved By: [Signature on file] 08/14/2008 

Larry Elliott Date 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

2 of 32

This page intentionally left blank 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

3 of 32

Evaluation Report Summary: SEC-00124, CANEL 

This evaluation report by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) 

addresses a class of employees proposed for addition to the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) per the 

Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 

§ 7384 et seq. (EEOICPA) and 42 C.F.R. pt. 83, Procedures for Designating Classes of Employees 

as Members of the Special Exposure Cohort Under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 

Compensation Program Act of 2000. 

NIOSH-Proposed Class Definition

All employees of DOE, its predecessor agencies, and their contractors and subcontractors who worked 

at the Connecticut Aircraft Nuclear Engine Laboratory in Middletown, Connecticut, from January 1, 

1958 to December 31, 1965, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring 

either solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the parameters 

established for one or more other classes of employees included in the SEC. 

Feasibility of Dose Reconstruction

Per EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. § 83.14(b), NIOSH has established that it does not have sufficient 

information to complete dose reconstructions for individual members of the class with sufficient 

accuracy. NIOSH lacks sufficient dosimetry data, workplace monitoring data, and source term data, 

making reconstruction of total internal and external doses infeasible. 

Health Endangerment Determination

The NIOSH evaluation did not identify any evidence supplied by the petitioners or from other 

resources that would establish that the class was exposed to radiation during a discrete incident likely 

to have involved exceptionally high-level exposures, such as nuclear criticality incidents or other 

events involving similarly high levels of exposures. However, the evidence reviewed in this 

evaluation indicates that some workers in the class may have accumulated chronic radiation exposures 

through intakes of uranium, plutonium, fission and metal activation products and from direct exposure 

to radioactive materials. Therefore, 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(3)(ii) requires NIOSH to specify that health 

may have been endangered for those workers covered by this evaluation who were employed for a 

number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days within the parameters established for this 

class or in combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other 

classes of employees in the SEC. 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

4 of 32

This page intentionally left blank 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

5 of 32

Table of Contents 

Evaluation Report Summary: SEC-00124, CANEL ............................................................................... 3 

1.0 Purpose and Scope....................................................................................................................... 7 

2.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 7 

3.0 NIOSH-Proposed Class Definition and Petition Basis................................................................ 8 

4.0 Radiological Operations Relevant to the Proposed Class ........................................................... 8 

4.1 Operations Description....................................................................................................... 8 

4.2 Radiation Exposure Potential from Operations................................................................ 10 

4.3 Time Period Associated with Radiological Operations.................................................... 10 

4.4 Site Locations Associated with Radiological Operations ................................................ 10 

4.5 Job Descriptions Affected by Radiological Operations ................................................... 11 

5.0 Summary of Available Monitoring Data for the Proposed Class.............................................. 11 

5.1 Data Capture Efforts and Sources Reviewed ................................................................... 11 

5.2 Internal Personnel Monitoring Data ................................................................................. 12 

5.3 External Personnel Monitoring Data................................................................................ 12 

5.4 Workplace Monitoring Data............................................................................................. 13 

5.5 Radiological Source Term Data ....................................................................................... 13 

6.0 Feasibility of Dose Reconstruction for the Proposed Class ...................................................... 14 

6.1 Feasibility of Estimating Internal Exposures ................................................................... 14 

6.2 Feasibility of Estimating External Exposures .................................................................. 15 

6.3 Class Parameters Associated with Infeasibility................................................................ 15 

7.0 Summary of Feasibility Findings for Petition SEC-00124........................................................ 16 

8.0 Evaluation of Health Endangerment for Petition SEC-00124................................................... 16 

9.0 NIOSH-Proposed Class for Petition SEC-00124 ...................................................................... 17 

10.0 Evaluation of Second Similar Class .......................................................................................... 17 

11.0 References ................................................................................................................................. 19 

Attachment 1: Data Capture Matrices for CANEL ............................................................................... 23 

Table 

Table 5-1: AEC Annual Whole-Body Exposure Results ...................................................................... 12 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

6 of 32

This page intentionally left blank 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

7 of 32

SEC Petition Evaluation Report for SEC-00124

ATTRIBUTION AND ANNOTATION: This is a single-author document. All conclusions drawn from 

the data presented in this evaluation were made by the ORAU Team Lead Technical Evaluator: James 

Mahathy, Oak Ridge Associated Universities. These conclusions were peer-reviewed by the 

individuals listed on the cover page. The rationales for all conclusions in this document are explained 

in the associated text. 

1.0 Purpose and Scope 

This report evaluates the feasibility of reconstructing doses for employees who worked at a specific 

facility during a specified time. It provides information and analysis germane to considering a petition 

for adding a class of employees to the Congressionally-created SEC. 

This report does not make any determinations concerning the feasibility of dose reconstruction that 

necessarily apply to any individual energy employee who might require a dose reconstruction from 

NIOSH, with the exception of the employee whose dose reconstruction could not be completed, and 

whose claim consequently led to this petition evaluation. The finding in this report is not the final 

determination as to whether or not the proposed class will be added to the SEC. This report will be 

considered by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (the Board) and by the Secretary 

of Health and Human Services (HHS). The Secretary of HHS will make final decisions concerning 

whether or not to add one or more classes to the SEC in response to the petition addressed by this 

report. 

This evaluation, in which NIOSH provides its findings both on the feasibility of estimating radiation 

doses of members of this class with sufficient accuracy and on health endangerment, was conducted in 

accordance with the requirements of EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. § 83.14. 

2.0 Introduction 

Both EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. pt. 83 require NIOSH to evaluate qualified petitions requesting that the 

Department of Health and Human Services add a class of employees to the SEC. The evaluation is 

intended to provide a fair, science-based determination of whether it is feasible to estimate, with 

sufficient accuracy, the radiation doses of the proposed class of employees through NIOSH dose 

reconstructions.1

NIOSH is required to document its evaluation in a report, and to do so, relies upon both its own dose 

reconstruction expertise as well as technical support from its contractor, Oak Ridge Associated 

Universities (ORAU). Once completed, NIOSH provides the report to both the petitioners and the 

Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health. The Board will consider the NIOSH evaluation 

report, together with the petition, comments of the petitioner(s) and such other information as the 

Board considers appropriate, to make recommendations to the Secretary of HHS on whether or not to 

add one or more classes of employees to the SEC. Once NIOSH has received and considered the 

 

1

 NIOSH dose reconstructions under EEOICPA are performed using the methods promulgated under 42 C.F.R. pt. 82 and 

the detailed implementation guidelines available at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas. 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

8 of 32

advice of the Board, the Director of NIOSH will propose a decision on behalf of HHS. The Secretary 

of HHS will make the final decision, taking into account the NIOSH evaluation, the advice of the 

Board, and the proposed decision issued by NIOSH. As part of this final decision process, the 

petitioner(s) may seek a review of certain types of final decisions issued by the Secretary of HHS.2

3.0 NIOSH-Proposed Class Definition and Petition Basis 

The NIOSH-proposed class includes all employees of DOE, its predecessor agencies, and DOE 

contractors or subcontractors who worked at the Connecticut Aircraft Nuclear Engine Laboratory in 

Middletown, Connecticut, from January 1, 1958 through December 31, 1965, for a number of work 

days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either solely under this employment or in 

combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of 

employees in the SEC. During this period, employees at this facility were involved with design, 

development, and testing of nuclear engines for aircraft and research activities using radiological 

materials. 

The evaluation responds to Petition SEC-00124 which was submitted by an EEOICPA claimant 

whose dose reconstruction could not be completed by NIOSH due to a lack of sufficient dosimetryrelated information. This claimant was employed as an analytical chemist and corrosion chemist from 

1958 through 1977. NIOSH’s determination that it is unable to complete a dose reconstruction for an 

EEOICPA claimant is a qualified basis for submitting an SEC petition pursuant to 42 C.F.R. § 

83.9(b). 

4.0 Radiological Operations Relevant to the Proposed Class 

The following subsections summarize the radiological operations at the Connecticut Aircraft Nuclear 

Engine Laboratory (CANEL) from January 1, 1958 through December 31, 1965 and the information 

available to NIOSH to characterize particular processes and radioactive source materials. Using 

available sources, NIOSH has attempted to gather process and source descriptions, information 

regarding the identity and quantities of radionuclides of concern, and information describing processes 

through which the radiation exposures of concern may have occurred and the physical environment in 

which they may have occurred. The information included within this evaluation report is meant only 

to be a summary of the available information. 

4.1 Operations Description 

CANEL staff worked from 1958 through 1961 on an Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) program to 

develop a nuclear reactor for propelling aircraft. The CANEL site, approximately five miles south of 

Middletown, Connecticut, was chosen in part because of its proximity to Pratt & Whitney Aircraft 

(PWAC) in East Hartford, Connecticut. The CANEL facility conducted research and development of 

indirect cycle technology that relied on steam generated by a nuclear reactor as a power source. The 

program focused on developing high-temperature materials and reactor technology for application to 

 

2

 See 42 C.F.R. pt. 83 for a full description of the procedures summarized here. Additional internal procedures are 

available at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas. 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

9 of 32

high-performance systems used in military aircraft. The indirect cycle consisted of a primary heat 

transfer fluid circuit that carried heat from the reactor to a heat exchanger or radiator where the heat 

was transferred to the air going through the engine. Pratt & Whitney eventually produced a mock-up 

of the physical concept but an actual power-producing reactor was never built. The mock-up involved 

testing at CANEL using an actual reactor (built at Oak Ridge National Laboratory) using fissionable 

material operating at zero power. Because no power was produced, no heat removal system was 

necessary and little or no shielding was installed (Giguere-Davis, 1980). In 1961, the federal 

government canceled all efforts to develop nuclear-powered aircraft (Giguere-Davis, 1980). 

Starting in 1962, CANEL assisted the AEC in design and development of the SNAP-50, a lightweight 

nuclear power reactor designed to operate in space. This effort used technology acquired in the 

indirect cycle technology work. CANEL’s primary objective with SNAP-50 was the further 

development of heat dissipation in the reactor using lithium as a coolant. The use of lithium required 

CANEL to develop and test alloys for tubes, pumps, and valves to contain and move the coolant 

(Space, 1962). While there is no evidence that CANEL built a SNAP-50 reactor, CANEL did perform 

bench-scale experiments using critical assemblies in a hot-cell facility (PWAC-474). 

From 1961 through 1965, CANEL operated the CANEL Fuels program for the AEC. This program 

was also known as the Critical Assembly Fuel Element Exchange (CAFEE) fuel storage facility 

(Shaw, 1965). One of the specific tasks performed during the CAFEE program was the Medium 

Power Reactor Program in which CANEL was tasked to fabricate components (Garnett, 1965a). In 

addition, CANEL performed research and development in the following areas: high-temperature 

nuclear fuel elements, liquid metal components, high-temperature compatibility of liquid metal 

coolants in other materials, and experimentation in detection of fission particles and neutrons 

(PWAC-378; PWAC-393; PWAC-397; PWAC-424). AEC operations were terminated at the CANEL 

site in 1965 (NUREG-1444). After the CANEL site was sold to United Aircraft, commercial nonAEC operations were conducted from 1967 through 1971 using AEC byproduct licenses (NUREG1444). These operations are not covered under EEOICPA. 

Documents available to NIOSH provide general process descriptions of the nuclear propulsion work 

and the radioactive materials remaining from the CANEL Fuels program. The radionuclides of 

concern during the nuclear propulsion work were depleted and enriched uranium, plutonium, metal 

activation products, and mixed fission products. The site also had several fission product sources used 

for calibration and radiography. Radionuclides of concern during the CANEL Fuels program included 

depleted uranium (Corley, 1962), and enriched uranium up to 65% (Fader, 1964; ORNL, 1960). The 

use of U-233 is suggested by a CANEL materials forecast for 1961 (CNLM-2438). Activation and 

fission products resulted from SNAP-50 activities. Two such activities that potentially resulted in 

small sources of activation and fission product exposures are discussed in PWAC-453 and 

PWAC-474; however, NIOSH does not have documentation that locates these tasks in particular 

buildings. CANEL documents discuss work with irradiated materials being done in hot cells, venting 

of fission products during post-irradiation experiments, and the storage and shipment of radioactive 

wastes and materials (capsules, powders, and metals). 

Some of the CANEL inventory of enriched uranium was transferred to General Atomics in July 1964 

(Fader, 1964). Additional enriched uranium, equipment, and fuel capsules formerly used in the 

SNAP-50 program were shipped to Atomics International, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 

and Oak Ridge National Laboratory from September through November 1965 (Harms, 1965; 

Weinberg, 1965). Additional contaminated equipment was removed from CANEL by the AEC from 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

10 of 32

November 1965 through July 1966; the site was transferred to Pratt & Whitney in September 1966 

(Glauberman, 1966). Prior to the site transfer, all areas were decontaminated to AEC levels for 

unconditional release except for Buildings 150 (Fuel Elements Laboratory) and 450 (Hot Laboratory), 

particularly the hot cells in those areas (Glauberman, 1966). However, Pratt & Whitney assumed 

responsibility for these buildings and used them for commercial applications under AEC byproduct 

licenses. 

4.2 Radiation Exposure Potential from Operations 

The potential for external radiation dose existed at CANEL. Based on the site operations outlined in 

Section 4.1, sources of exposure included electrons, photons, and neutrons emitted during nuclear 

interactions or from decay products of, U-235, U-238, Pu-239, metal activation products, and mixed 

fission products. CANEL personnel handled uranium (natural, enriched, and depleted) and plutonium 

during the indirect cycle technology work. Workers were potentially exposed to external radiation of 

varying types and energies, and to surface and airborne contamination resulting from spillage, venting, 

or loss of containment of radioactive materials. Workers were also potentially exposed to small levels 

of neutrons resulting from tests of the critical assemblies. CANEL had several fission product sources 

used for calibration and radiography. These sources, which included Co-60 and Ir-192, would have 

been a source of external electron and photon radiation. 

The primary sources of internal radiation exposure at the site were the potential release of airborne 

uranium and plutonium and the spread and re-suspension of these contaminants. Radiation surveys 

performed in 1966 measured surface contamination (Glauberman, 1966). Forms of uranium used at 

CANEL included uranium metal, uranium dioxide, uranium nitride, uranium carbide, and uranyl 

nitrate, some of which was formed during fuel assembly testing (Corley, 1962; Harms, 1965). NIOSH 

has no information regarding the chemical forms or solubility characteristics of the plutonium and 

fission and activation products encountered at CANEL. NIOSH does not have documentation to 

determine the total concentrations of uranium, plutonium materials, fission and metal activation 

products used or generated from 1958 through 1965, although a total activity amount of 500,000 

curies is given for all radioactive materials (NUREG-1444). NIOSH has found documents presenting 

activity forecasts for enriched U-233, U-235, U-238, and plutonium for some of the operational years; 

however, NIOSH cannot assume that the amounts actually placed into inventory corresponded to the 

forecasts. 

4.3 Time Period Associated with Radiological Operations 

Per the DOE Office of Health, Safety and Security, the DOE operational period was from 1958 

through 1965 (DOE, 2001). 

4.4 Site Locations Associated with Radiological Operations 

The CANEL facility covered about 1,100 acres. It had its own security force, fire department, sewage 

treatment plant, power generator, and water supply. Work with radioactive materials was conducted 

in 22 of the 34 buildings on site, including Buildings 140 (Nuclear Materials Research and 

Development Laboratory), 150 (Fuel Elements Laboratory), 440 (Nuclear Physics Laboratory) and 

450 (Hot Laboratory). Radioactive materials and waste were also stored in other areas of the site, 

though these buildings and locations have not been documented by building number. 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

11 of 32

The potential for radiation dose existed in all locations at CANEL where radioactive materials were 

handled, used, transported, disposed, or stored. While NIOSH does have documentation indicating 

buildings where radioactive materials were known to have been used, NIOSH has no documentation 

to confirm that all radioactive materials were restricted to such areas or that contamination was 

adequately controlled. As a result, NIOSH must assume that the potential for exposure to radioactive 

materials existed in all CANEL buildings and areas. 

4.5 Job Descriptions Affected by Radiological Operations 

NIOSH has found no documentation associating job titles and/or job assignments with specific 

radiological operations or conditions. Without such information, NIOSH is unable to define potential 

radiation exposure conditions based on worker job descriptions. 

5.0 Summary of Available Monitoring Data for the Proposed Class 

The primary data used for determining internal exposures are derived from personal monitoring data, 

such as urinalyses, fecal samples, and whole-body counting results. If these are unavailable, the air 

monitoring data from breathing zone and general area monitoring are used to estimate the potential 

internal exposure. If personal monitoring and breathing zone area monitoring are unavailable, internal 

exposures can sometimes be estimated using more general area monitoring, process information, and 

information characterizing and quantifying the source term. 

This same hierarchy is used for determining the external exposures to the cancer site. Personal 

monitoring data from film badges or thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are the primary data used 

to determine such external exposures. If there are no personal monitoring data, exposure rate surveys, 

process knowledge, and source term modeling can sometimes be used to reconstruct the potential 

exposure. 

A more detailed discussion of the information required for dose reconstruction can be found in 

OCAS-IG-001, External Dose Reconstruction Implementation Guideline, and OCAS-IG-002, Internal 

Dose Reconstruction Implementation Guideline. These documents are available at: 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocasdose.html. 

5.1 Data Capture Efforts and Sources Reviewed 

In addition to examining its Site Research Database (SRDB) to locate documents supporting the 

evaluation of the proposed class, NIOSH identified and reviewed numerous data sources to locate 

information relevant to determining the feasibility of dose reconstruction for the class of employees 

proposed for this petition. This included determining the availability of information on personnel 

monitoring, workplace monitoring, and radiological source term data. 

NIOSH data capture efforts for CANEL focused on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (ADAMS 

electronic records repository), the DOE (OpenNet repository; Office of Scientific and Technical 

Information [OSTI], and the Oak Ridge Operations office), United Technologies, and the National 

Archives record centers. NIOSH found some documents detailing CANEL history, operations, and 

some very limited personnel monitoring data. Attachment One contains a summary of CANEL 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

12 of 32

documents. The summary specifically identifies specific data capture details for each document 

retrieved. 

NIOSH examined DOE records for the 25 CANEL claimants in the NIOSH OCAS Claims Tracking 

System (NOCTS). No external or internal monitoring data have been provided by DOE for any of 

these claimants. 

5.2 Internal Personnel Monitoring Data 

NIOSH has obtained uranium urinalysis results for 20 CANEL workers (AEC, 1958). These results 

represent analysis for total uranium with result values of 0.000 mg/l with no reported error or 

minimum detectable activity provided. All samples were collected on February 4, 1958. None of 

these 20 urinalysis results represent data for any of the present 25 CANEL EEOICPA claimants. 

NIOSH has obtained an AEC annual summary for 1961 that shows CANEL had no workers with 

measured body depositions of U-238 or fission products in 1960 (AEC, 1961a). However, that 

summary report did not provide the number of workers who were monitored or information on 

monitoring and analytical methodologies. NIOSH has found such data only for the year 1960. 

5.3 External Personnel Monitoring Data 

NIOSH has not identified any personnel external monitoring data for CANEL workers. NIOSH has 

identified some film badge data for Pratt & Whitney workers, but the monitoring was performed at 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in 1956 and 1957 (LLNL, 1957) and does not correspond to 

CANEL work. 

NIOSH has obtained AEC annual summaries of whole-body exposure from external penetrating 

radiation for CANEL workers, as shown in Table 5-1. 

Table 5-1: AEC Annual Whole-Body Exposure Results 

Year 

(Reference) 

Unmonitored 

Workers 

Monitored 

Workers 

Number of Workers 

with Specified Results 

 0 to 1 rem 1 to 2 rem 2 to 3 rem 

1960 

(AEC, 1961b) 

2132 258 237 15 6 

1961 

(AEC, 1962) 

1107 235 220 14 1 

1962 

(AEC, 1963) 

1411 197 192 5 0 

1964 

(AEC, 1965) 

1041 152 143 8 1 

1965 

(AEC, 1966) 

1041 132 126 6 0 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

13 of 32

NIOSH has obtained no data associated with any occupationally-required medical X-ray examinations 

for CANEL claimants or workers. 

5.4 Workplace Monitoring Data 

NIOSH has not identified any workplace surface monitoring or air monitoring results for the DOE 

operations period. NIOSH has obtained surface contamination (gross alpha) and air concentration 

data (gross alpha) for Buildings 140 and 150 from a 1966 close-out survey conducted at CANEL 

(Glauberman, 1966). Around 850 smear samples were collected on floors, walls, and surfaces of 

equipment during the pre-, intermediate, and post-equipment removal operations. Results of the final 

instrument and smear survey performed in May 1966 indicate that the highest removable surface 

concentration in a specific area was 7.7 alpha dpm/100cm2 (disintegrations per minute per 100 square 

centimeters); the permissible level was 100 dpm/100cm2

. The maximum fixed contamination level 

was 600 alpha dpm/100cm2

; the permissible level was 2000 dpm/100cm2. 

Results of air samples obtained during the disassembly and removal of contaminated equipment at 

various locations and times ranged from no detectable activity to 10.7 alpha dpm/m3 (dpm per cubic 

meter) and had a composite average of approximately 2.2 dpm/100cm3; (dpm per 100 cubic 

centimeters); the maximum permissible concentration was 220 dpm/100cm3 for enriched uranium. 

The highest air sample concentrations, obtained during the removal of two fume hoods in Room 81 of 

Building 140, were reported to have resulted in an average air concentration of 84 dpm/100cm3. Air 

samples taken 24 hours after the hood removal had been completed showed that the average air 

concentration had decreased to 4.8 dpm/100cm3. 

5.5 Radiological Source Term Data 

NIOSH has identified documentation describing and quantifying some of the CANEL source term. 

Records show that CANEL received depleted and enriched uranium from Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory (ORNL) in 1962 (Shaw, 1965), shipped enriched uranium (65%) to General Atomics in 

1964 (Fader, 1964), and shipped depleted and enriched uranium to Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory, Atomics International, General Atomics, and ORNL in 1965 (Cope, 1965; Garnett, 

1965b; Shaw, 1965; Weinberg, 1965). NIOSH has information on the quantities and forms of 

uranium shipped in 1965. However, NIOSH does not have information detailing the receipts of 

shipments of other radioactive materials. Forms of uranium materials used at CANEL included 

uranium metal, uranium dioxide, uranium nitride, uranium carbide, and uranyl nitrate (Corley, 1962; 

Harms, 1965). 

Fission products and metal activation products were generated in CANEL processes (PWAC-453; 

PWAC-474). NIOSH does not have information to characterize the chemical or physical forms of the 

radionuclides produced, or to determine the activity levels present during AEC operations. 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

14 of 32

6.0 Feasibility of Dose Reconstruction for the Proposed Class 

42 C.F.R. § 83.14(b) states that HHS will consider a NIOSH determination that there was insufficient 

information to complete a dose reconstruction, as indicated in this present case, to be sufficient,

without further consideration, to conclude that it is not feasible to estimate the levels of radiation 

doses of individual members of the class with sufficient accuracy. 

In the case of a petition submitted to NIOSH under 42 C.F.R. § 83.9(b), NIOSH has already 

determined that a dose reconstruction cannot be completed for an employee at the DOE or AWE 

facility. This determination by NIOSH provides the basis for the petition by the affected claimant. 

Per § 83.14(a), the NIOSH-proposed class defines those employees who, based on completed 

research, are similarly affected and for whom, as a class, dose reconstruction is similarly not feasible. 

In accordance with § 83.14(a), NIOSH may establish a second class of co-workers at the facility for 

whom NIOSH believes that dose reconstruction is similarly infeasible, but for whom additional 

research and analysis is required. If so identified, NIOSH would address this second class in a 

separate SEC evaluation rather than delay consideration of the claim currently under evaluation (see 

Section 10). This would allow NIOSH, the Board, and HHS to complete, without delay, their 

consideration of the class that includes a claimant for whom NIOSH has already determined a dose 

reconstruction cannot be completed, and whose only possible remedy under EEOICPA is the addition 

of a class of employees to the SEC. 

This section of the report summarizes research findings by which NIOSH determined that it lacked 

sufficient information to complete the relevant dose reconstruction and on which basis it has defined 

the class of employees for which dose reconstruction is not feasible. NIOSH’s determination relies on 

the same statutory and regulatory criteria that govern consideration of all SEC petitions. 

6.1 Feasibility of Estimating Internal Exposures 

NIOSH has evaluated the available personnel and workplace monitoring data and source term 

information and has determined that there are insufficient data for estimating internal exposures, as 

described below. 

NIOSH has obtained a total of only 20 uranium bioassay results, all of which were for monitoring 

performed in February 1958. These bioassay results are insufficient to reconstruct dose because all 20 

results were reported as 0.000 mg/l with no assessment of uncertainty; furthermore, all the results 

represent samples collected on the same day. NIOSH also lacks information on the CANEL locations 

where the sampled employees worked and whether the sampled workers represented a cross-section of 

potentially-exposed personnel. NIOSH has not obtained breathing zone or general air monitoring 

results for the CANEL operational period. 

As stated in Section 5.4, NIOSH has obtained limited workplace monitoring results in the form of 

surface contamination and air concentration data for Buildings 140 and 150 from a 1966 close-out 

survey (Glauberman, 1966). The available data apply to operations after 1965 and therefore cannot be 

used to bound potential radiation doses during the DOE period. NIOSH lacks isotopic assumptions, 

total activity quantities of uranium, data on uranium enrichments, and information on chemical and 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

15 of 32

physical forms for uranium handled during the DOE period. NIOSH has obtained no workplace 

monitoring results for the covered DOE operations period at CANEL. 

Indications are that CANEL operations involved handling of depleted and enriched uranium, U-233, 

plutonium, metal activation products, and mixed fission products. While NIOSH has obtained limited 

documentation on amounts and forms of uranium transferred to other sites, NIOSH cannot verify the 

completeness of available documentation; nor can NIOSH assume that the final forms reported in the 

transfer documents represent the chemical and physical forms that were handled during CANEL 

processing. NIOSH lacks documentation to accurately define the source term for uranium, plutonium, 

metal activation and mixed fission products during the covered DOE operations period at CANEL. 

NIOSH does not have access to sufficient personnel monitoring, workplace monitoring, or source 

term data to bound potential internal exposures to uranium, plutonium, or to metal activation and 

mixed fission products during the period of DOE operations. Consequently, NIOSH finds that it is 

not feasible to estimate, with sufficient accuracy, the total internal dose for the class of employees 

covered by this evaluation. 

6.2 Feasibility of Estimating External Exposures 

This evaluation responds to a petition based on NIOSH determining that internal radiation exposures 

to uranium, plutonium, and metal activation and mixed fission products could not be reconstructed for 

a dose reconstruction referred to NIOSH by the Department of Labor (DOL). As noted above, HHS 

will consider this determination to be sufficient without further consideration to determine that it is 

not feasible to estimate the levels of radiation doses of individual members of the class with sufficient 

accuracy. Consequently, it is not necessary for NIOSH to fully evaluate the feasibility of 

reconstructing external radiation exposures for the class of workers covered by this report. 

Based on the evaluation conducted for this report, NIOSH does not consider it feasible to estimate 

potential external exposures to uranium, plutonium, metal activation products, or mixed fission 

products during the period of DOE operations. Although NIOSH has some annual summaries of 

whole-body exposure data, NIOSH does not have access to any individual monitoring data, nor is 

there sufficient information on site radiological monitoring practices and source terms to be able to 

use the summary information to bound external exposures from all sources and radiation types. 

However, adequate reconstruction of medical dose for CANEL workers is likely to be feasible by 

using claimant-favorable assumptions, as well as the applicable protocols in the complex-wide 

Technical Information Bulletin Dose Reconstruction from Occupationally Related Diagnostic X-Ray 

Procedures (ORAUT-OTIB-0006). 

6.3 Class Parameters Associated with Infeasibility 

NIOSH has insufficient information to identify specific start or end dates for radiological operations 

within the covered period at CANEL. NIOSH therefore recommends that the class definition include 

the entire DOE-covered period of January 1, 1958 through December 31, 1965. 

As discussed in Section 4.4, NIOSH has no documentation to demonstrate that radioactive materials 

were restricted to specific areas or that contamination was adequately controlled. NIOSH therefore 

assumes that the potential for exposure to radioactive materials existed in all CANEL buildings and 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

16 of 32

areas. NIOSH recommends that the class definition include all CANEL buildings and areas during 

the specified time period. 

NIOSH has found no documentation associating job titles and/or job assignments with specific 

radiological operations or conditions. Without such information, NIOSH is unable to define the 

proposed SEC class based on worker job descriptions. NIOSH therefore recommends that the class 

definition include all employees of DOE, its predecessor agencies, and DOE contractors or 

subcontractors. 

7.0 Summary of Feasibility Findings for Petition SEC-00124 

This report evaluates the feasibility for completing dose reconstructions for employees at the 

Connecticut Aircraft Nuclear Engine Laboratory from January 1, 1958 through December 31, 1965. 

NIOSH determined that members of this class may have received internal and external radiation 

exposures. NIOSH lacks sufficient information, which includes specific biological monitoring data, 

sufficient air monitoring information, and sufficient process and radiological source information, that 

would allow it to estimate the potential internal and external exposures to uranium, plutonium, metal 

activation products and mixed fission products to which the proposed class may have been subjected. 

However, adequate reconstruction of medical dose for CANEL workers is likely to be feasible. 

NIOSH has documented herein that it cannot complete the dose reconstructions related to this petition. 

The basis of this finding demonstrates that NIOSH does not have access to sufficient information to 

estimate either the maximum radiation dose incurred by any member of the class or to estimate such 

radiation doses more precisely than a maximum dose estimate. 

8.0 Evaluation of Health Endangerment for Petition SEC-00124 

The health endangerment determination for the class of employees covered by this evaluation report is 

governed by EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. § 83.14(b) and § 83.13(c)(3). Pursuant to these requirements, if 

it is not feasible to estimate with sufficient accuracy radiation doses for members of the class, NIOSH 

must determine that there is a reasonable likelihood that such radiation doses may have endangered 

the health of members of the class. The regulations require NIOSH to assume that any duration of 

unprotected exposure may have endangered the health of members of a class when it has been 

established that the class may have been exposed to radiation during a discrete incident likely to have 

involved levels of exposure similarly high to those occurring during nuclear criticality incidents. If 

the occurrence of such an exceptionally high-level exposure has not been established, then NIOSH is 

required to specify that health was endangered for those workers who were employed for a number of 

work days aggregating at least 250 work days within the parameters established for the class or in 

combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of 

employees in the SEC. 

NIOSH has determined that members of the class were not exposed to radiation during a discrete 

incident likely to have involved levels of exposure similarly high to those occurring during nuclear 

criticality incidents. However, the evidence reviewed in this evaluation indicates that some workers in 

the class may have accumulated chronic radiation exposures through intakes of radionuclides and 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

17 of 32

from direct exposure to radioactive materials. Consequently, NIOSH is specifying that health was 

endangered for those workers covered by this evaluation who were employed for a number of work 

days aggregating at least 250 work days within the parameters established for this class or in 

combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of 

employees in the SEC. 

9.0 NIOSH-Proposed Class for Petition SEC-00124 

The evaluation defines a single class of employees for which NIOSH cannot estimate radiation doses 

with sufficient accuracy. This class includes all employees of DOE, its predecessor agencies, and 

DOE contractors or subcontractors who worked at the Connecticut Aircraft Nuclear Engine 

Laboratory in Middletown, Connecticut, from January 1, 1958 through December 31, 1965, for a 

number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either solely under this 

employment or in combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more 

other classes of employees in the SEC. 

 

10.0 Evaluation of Second Similar Class 

In accordance with § 83.14(a), NIOSH may establish a second class of co-workers at the facility, 

similar to the class defined in Section 9.0, for whom NIOSH believes that dose reconstruction may not 

be feasible, and for whom additional research and analyses is required. If a second class is identified, 

it would require additional research and analyses. Such a class would be addressed in a separate SEC 

evaluation rather than delay consideration of the current claim. At this time, NIOSH has not identified 

a second similar class of employees at the CANEL site for whom dose reconstruction may not be 

feasible. 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

18 of 32

This page intentionally left blank 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

19 of 32

11.0 References 

42 C.F.R. pt. 81, Guidelines for Determining the Probability of Causation Under the Energy 

Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000; Final Rule, Federal 

Register/Vol. 67, No. 85/Thursday, p 22,296; May 2, 2002; SRDB Ref ID: 19391 

42 C.F.R. pt. 82, Methods for Radiation Dose Reconstruction Under the Energy Employees 

Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000; Final Rule; May 2, 2002; SRDB Ref ID: 

19392 

42 C.F.R. pt. 83, Procedures for Designating Classes of Employees as Members of the Special 

Exposure Cohort Under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 

2000; Final Rule; May 28, 2004; SRDB Ref ID: 22001 

42 U.S.C. §§ 7384-7385 [EEOICPA], Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 

Program Act of 2000; as amended; OCAS website 

CNLM-2438, Forecast of Nuclear Materials Requirements FY-1960 and 1961, U-233, Pratt & 

Whitney; April 1, 1960; SRDB Ref ID: 45009 

NUREG-1444, Site Decommissioning Management Plan, United Technologies/Pratt & Whitney, 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission; October 1993; SRDB Ref ID: 33192, pdf pp. 103-105 

ORAUT-OTIB-0006, Dose Reconstruction from Occupationally Related Diagnostic X-Ray 

Procedures, Rev. 03 PC-1: Oak Ridge Associated Universities; December 21, 2005; SRDB Ref ID: 

20220 

PWAC-378, The Thermal Decomposition of Uranium Monocarbide, Pratt & Whitney; January 15, 

1962; SRDB Ref ID: 32568 

PWAC-393, The Determination of Uranium Isotope Abundances and Reactor Fuel Burnup by Mass 

Spectrometry, Pratt & Whitney; April 17, 1963; SRDB Ref ID: 32569 

PWAC-397, Geometrical Attenuation Factors for Gamma Radiation from Cylindrical and Spherical 

Surface Sources, Pratt & Whitney; September 15, 1963; SRDB Ref ID: 32570 

PWAC-424, LCRE Neutron Sensor Development Program, Pratt & Whitney; March 23, 1964; SRDB 

Ref ID: 32572 

PWAC-453, Determination of Relative Power Distributions in CANEL Critical Assemblies Using 

Catcher Foil Techniques, Pratt & Whitney; February 24, 1965; SRDB Ref ID: 32576 

PWAC-474, Determination of Absolute Power in SNAP-50 Critical Assemblies by Ba-140 Fission 

Product Measurements, Pratt & Whitney; July 30, 1965; SRDB Ref ID: 32577 

AEC, 1958, Bioassay data, Pratt & Whitney, 1954-1958; Atomic Energy Commission; 1958; SRDB 

Ref ID: 9002, pdf pp. 1 and 2 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

20 of 32

AEC, 1961a, Summary of Radiation Exposures Resulting in the Internal Body Deposition of 

Radioactive Material for the Year, Lockland Aircraft Reactors Operations Office, Atomic Energy 

Commission; 1961; SRDB Ref ID: 13786, pdf pp. 36 

AEC, 1961b, Summary of Whole Body Radiation Exposures to External Penetrating Radiation 

Accumulated During the Year, Lockland Aircraft Reactors Operations Office, Atomic Energy 

Commission; 1961; SRDB Ref ID: 13786, pdf pp. 35 

AEC, 1962, Summary of Whole Body Radiation Exposures to External Penetrating Radiation 

Accumulated During the Year, New York Operations Office, Atomic Energy Commission; 1962; 

SRDB Ref ID: 13789, pdf pp. 51 

AEC, 1963, Summary of Whole Body Radiation Exposures to External Penetrating Radiation 

Accumulated During the Year, New York Operations Office, Atomic Energy Commission; 1963; 

SRDB Ref ID: 13790, pdf pp. 39 

AEC, 1965, Summary of Whole Body Radiation Exposures to External Penetrating Radiation 

Accumulated During the Year, New York Operations Office, Atomic Energy Commission; 1965; 

SRDB Ref ID: 14442, pdf pp. 62 

AEC, 1966, Summary of Whole Body Radiation Exposures to External Penetrating Radiation 

Accumulated During the Year, New York Operations Office, Atomic Energy Commission; 1965; 

SRDB Ref ID: 13797, pdf pp. 66 

Cope, 1965, Memorandum, Former SNAP-50 UC Fuel Capsules, David Cope; Reactor Division, 

Atomic Energy Commission; September 17, 1965; SRDB Ref ID: 31549, pdf p. 16 

Corley, 1962, Memorandum, Former SNAP-50 UC fuel capsules, Alice Corley; Research Services 

Branch, Research and Development, Atomic Energy Commission; August 24, 1962; SRDB Ref ID: 

31557, pdf p. 11 

DOE, 2001, CANEL site description in the DOE Worker Advocacy Facility List; U.S. Department of 

Energy; June 11, 2001; SRDB Ref ID: 9027 

Fader, 1964, Atomic Energy Commission SS shipping form, Pratt & Whitney; July 21, 1964; SRDB 

Ref ID: 19022, pdf p. 83 

Garnett, 1965a, Memorandum, Vacuum Dry Box and Furnace Assemblies, R. R. Garnett, CANEL 

Project Office, Atomic Energy Commission, September 14, 1965; SRDB Ref ID: 31549, pdf page 13). 

Garnett, 1965b, Memorandum, Disposition of the CANEL Fuels Program, R. R. Garnett, CANEL 

Project Office; Atomic Energy Commission; August 16, 1965; SRDB Ref ID: 31549, pdf pp. 28 and 

29 

Giguere-Davis, 1980, Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion Program of Pratt & Whitney Aircraft Division, 

UTC Archive Report No. 17, Draft; Marguerite A. Giguere-Davis; United Technologies; December 

24, 1980; SRDB Ref ID: 32579 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

21 of 32

Glauberman, 1966, Removal of Contaminated Equipment at the CANEL Facility, Middletown, 

Connecticut, Harold Glauberman; Operation Safety Branch, U. S. Government; September 30, 1966; 

SRDB Ref ID: 33915 

Harms, 1965, Memorandum, UN and UC Powder from CANEL, W. O. Harms; Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory; November 11, 1965; SRDB Ref ID: 31548, pdf pp. 1 and 2 

LLNL, 1957, Radiation Over-exposures of Pratt & Whitney Personnel, Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory; 1957; SRDB Ref ID: 36118 

ORNL, 1960, Letter, Request for Information Regarding Availability of Pratt & Whitney Materials, 

IC-2251, from M. E. Ramsey (Asst. Laboratory Director, ORNL) to Dr. H. M. Roth (U.S. Atomic 

Energy Commission); March 3, 1960; SRDB Ref ID: 45000, pdf pp. 7 and 8 

Shaw, 1965, Relocation of The CAFEE Storage Facility, Milton Shaw; Division of Reactor 

Development & Technology, Atomic Energy Commission; November 10, 1965; SRDB Ref ID: 31545 

Space, 1962, Article: Reactor for Space, Time Magazine; December 7, 1962; SRDB Ref ID: 46653 

Weinberg, 1965, Memorandum to Harold B. Finger, AEC from Alvin Weinberg, Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory; September 15, 1965; SRDB Ref ID: 31549, pdf pp. 36 and 37 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL CANEL

22 of 32

This page intentionally left blank 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL 

23 of 32 

Attachment 1: Data Capture Matrices for CANEL 

Table A1-1: SUMMARY OF SRDB HOLDINGS RELATED TO CANEL 

Data Capture Information General Description of Documents Captured Date 

Primary Site/Company Name: Connecticut Aircraft Nuclear Engine Laboratory (CANEL)1958-1965 Other Site Names: Pratt & Whitney Corp. 

E-mail correspondence including a summary report of the ANP project history. 

05/14/2

State Contacted: Connecticut Division of Radiation, Department of Environmental Protection. 

Connecticut, as a non-agreement state, does not have monitoring or inspection records for licensed facilities. 

03/13/2

Comprehensive Epidemiologic Data Resource (CEDR) No relevant documents identified. 04/15/2DOE Hanford Declassified Document Retrieval System (DDRS) 

No relevant documents identified. 04/14/2

DOE Legacy Management Considered Sites Removal of contaminated equipment and final post-decon 

survey. 

05/18/2

DOE Legacy Management - MoundView (Fernald Holdings, includes Fernald Legal Database) 

Proceedings of the ninth annual conference on bio assay and analytical chemistry, October 10 and 11, 1963. 

02/07/2

DOE OpenNet No relevant documents identified. 04/12/2DOE OSTI Energy Citations Environmental data and hazards summaries. 04/12/2DOE OSTI Information Bridge Bibliography of CANEL reports, NRC decommissioning 

overview of CANEL, and effects of neutron irradiation on columbium base alloys. 

04/10/2

General Atomics Nuclear materials transfer reports. 11/02/2Google General information, NRC inspection, a news story regarding 

perception of delayed claim settlement, and an individual's resume. 

07/22/2

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) Radiation overexposures of Pratt & Whitney personnel. 05/17/2NARA Atlanta Material transfers, process information, equipment transfers, 

outline and status report on ORNL-ANP program, and a summary of data presented by Pratt & Whitney Aircraft at the ANPO materials meeting in Germantown, Maryland. 

05/21/2

National Academies Press (NAP) No relevant documents identified. 05/09/2
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL 

24 of 32

Table A1-1: SUMMARY OF SRDB HOLDINGS RELATED TO CANEL 

Data Capture Information General Description of Documents Captured Date 

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) - Nevada Site Office 

No relevant documents identified. 04/18/2

NRC Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS) 

Communications concerning radiation exposure, licensing documents, inspections, and responses to FOIA requests. 

04/15/2

ORAU Data completion verification and project spreadsheet. 05/18/2OSTI NRC's decommissioning overview of CANEL, bibliography of 

CANEL reports, recoverable scrap at station SYL to be shipped to station CYT, forecast of nuclear materials requirements, progress reports of hot laboratory operations, and a CANEL material specification. 

06/12/2

U.S. NRC FOIA requests. 10/09/2Washington State University (U.S. Transuranium and Uranium Registries) 

No relevant documents identified. 04/15/2

Washington University Libraries - St. Louis Research reports from the Atomic Energy technical report 

PWAC series. 

04/25/2

Unknown (typical explanation: part of the original OCAS download when the SRDB was set up) 

Bioassay results, accident reports, general information, and a license renewal. 

10/09/2

TOTAL 

Table A1-2: INTERNET DATABASE SEARCHES RELATED TO CANEL 

Database / Source Keywords / Phrases 

DOE Legacy Management Considered Sites http://csd.lm.doe.gov/ COMPLETED 05/18/2007 

N/A 

"connecticut aircraft nuclear engine laboratory" "United Aircraft Corp" 

DOE OSTI Information Bridge http://www.osti.gov/bridge/advancedsearch.jsp COMPLETED 04/10/2008 "connecticut advanced nuclear engineering laboratory" 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL 

25 of 32

Table A1-2: INTERNET DATABASE SEARCHES RELATED TO CANEL 

Database / Source Keywords / Phrases 

"pratt and whitney" "canel" "connecticut aircraft nuclear" “connecticut advanced nuclear” "pratt and whitney" "united aircraft corp" 

DOE OpenNet http://www.osti.gov/opennet/advancedsearch.jsp COMPLETED 04/12/2008 

"canel" "canel" “connecticut advanced nuclear” "connecticut aircraft nuclear engine laboratory" "united aircraft corp" 

DOE Energy Citations http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/ COMPLETED 04/12/2008 

"pratt and whitney" "middletown" connecticut aircraft nuclear "connecticut advanced nuclear" "connecticut aircraft nuclear" "pratt and whitney" "united aircraft" "canel" 

DOE Hanford DDRS http://www2.hanford.gov/declass/ COMPLETED 04/14/2008 

"united technologies" "connecticut aircraft nuclear engine laboratory" "United Aircraft Corp" “connecticut advanced nuclear” "pratt and whitney" "canel" 

NRC ADAMS Reading Room http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html COMPLETED 04/15/2008 

"united technologies" "connecticut advanced nuclear" "connecticut aircraft nuclear" "pratt and whitney" "united aircraft" "canel" 

CEDR http://cedr.lbl.gov/ COMPLETED 04/15/2008 

"united technologies" 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL 

26 of 32

Table A1-2: INTERNET DATABASE SEARCHES RELATED TO CANEL 

Database / Source Keywords / Phrases 

"connecticut advanced nuclear" "connecticut aircraft nuclear" "pratt and whitney" "united aircraft" "canel" 

U.S. Transuranium & Uranium Registries http://www.ustur.wsu.edu/ COMPLETED 04/15/2008 

"united technologies" "connecticut aircraft nuclear engine laboratory" "uranium" "connecticut aircraft nuclear engine laboratory" "canel" "nuclear" "uranium" radiation 1955 OR 1956 "united aircraft corp" plant operations "united aircraft corp" connecticut advanced nuclear engineering laboratory "pratt and whitney" "radiation monitoring" "pratt and whitney" "radiation accidents" "pratt and whitney" "radiation injuries" "pratt and whitney corp" "dosimetry" "pratt and whitney corp" "radioactive" "united aircraft corp" "radiation injuries" "united aircraft corp" "radiation exposure" "united aircraft corp" "radiation monitoring" "united aircraft corp" "radiation safety" "united aircraft corp" "radiation accidents" "united aircraft corp" "radioactivity" "united aircraft corp" "uranium" "united aircraft corp" "thorium" united aircraft corp "safety report" 

Google http://www.google.com COMPLETED 07/22/2008 

pratt and whitney "radiation" "middletown" 

NNSA - Nevada Site Office www.nv.doe.gov/main/search.htm COMPLETED 04/18/2008 

Historical Publications 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL 

27 of 32

Table A1-2: INTERNET DATABASE SEARCHES RELATED TO CANEL 

Database / Source Keywords / Phrases 

National Academy Press http://www.nap.edu COMPLETED 05/09/2008 

CANEL 

Table A1-3: OSTI DOCUMENTS REQUESTED FOR CANEL 

Document Number Document Title 

CNLM-1387 Reactor Hazards Dated 1/26/1959 CNLM-1424 Presentation to Members of the Advisory Committee on Reactor 

Safeguards and the Reactor Hazards Evaluation Staff of the Atomic 

Energy Commission Dated 3/4/1959 

CNLM-1935 Evaluation of the Residual Uranium Scrap Dated 9/18/1959 

CNLM-1978 Forecast of Nuclear Materials Requirements - Third Edition Fiscal 

Year 1960 (Plutonium) Dated 10/2/1959 

CNLM-2328 Work on a Preliminary Hazards Summary Report for Testing the 

PWAR-11C 2/15/1960 

CNLM-2438 Form AEC-408 Forecast Nuclear Materials Requirements First 

Revision Kilograms of U233 Dated 4/4/1960 

CNLM-2440 Forecast of Nuclear Materials Requirements First Revision Dated 

4/4/1960 

CNLM-2441 Forecast Nuclear Materials Requirements First Revision Kilograms 

of Enriched Plutonium Dated 4/4/1960 

CNLM-2442 Forecast Nuclear Materials Requirements First Revision Kilograms 

of Normal Uranium Dated 4/4/1960 

CNLM-2469 Resume of Anticipated P&WA Irradiation Experiments in Fiscal 

Years 1961 and 1962 Dated 4/8/1960 

CNLM-2470 Facilities for P&WA Reactor Development Program Dated 4/21/1960 CNLM-2509 Graded Ingots Dated 4/28/1960 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL 

28 of 32

Table A1-3: OSTI DOCUMENTS REQUESTED FOR CANEL 

Document Number Document Title 

CNLM-2543 Base Data for Environmental (Supp. A) Monitoring Samples Dated 

1/31/1961 

CNLM-2543 Base Data for Environmental Monitoring Samples Dated 5/11/1960 CNLM-2586 Reactor Fuel Burn up Analysis Report Dated 5/23/1960 CNLM-2661 Operating Procedure for Pneumomatic Controls Irradiation Test 

Using Moore Mod. 68-1 M. F. Relays Dated 6/22/1960 

CNLM-2665 Technical Program Summary of CANEL Dated 6/27/1960 CNLM-2732 Transmittal of FXD-523, Magnetic Tape and Print-Out of Information 

on Materials and Radiation Flux Data Dated 7/8/1960 

CNLM-275 Requirements for U235 and Normal Uranium Dated 10/14/1957 CNLM-276 Requirements for U235 and Normal Uranium Dated 10/14/1957 CNLM-3048 Manpower Requirements - Radiation Effects Unit Dated 10/24/1960 CNLM-3450 Post-Irradiation Examination (Supp. 26) of Fuel Capsules Dated 

2/16/1962 

CNLM-3450 Post-Irradiation Examination (Supp. 28) of Fuel Capsules. May 2, 

1962 Dated 5/4/1962 

CNLM-3450 Post-Irradiation Examination (Supp. 29) of Inpile Capsules Covering 

the Period May 1 - 11, 1962 Dated 5/23/1962 

CNLM-3450 Post-Irradiation Examination (Supp. 30) of Inpile Capsules Covering 

the Period May 14 - June 30, 1962 Dated 7/10/1962 

CNLM-3450 Post-Irradiation Examination (Supp. 31) of Inpile Capsules Covering 

the Period July 1 - July 31, 1962 Dated 8/6/1962 

CNLM-3450 Post-Irradiation Examination (Supp. 32) of Inpile Capsules Covering 

the Period August 1 - August 31, 1962 Dated 9/17/1962 

CNLM-3450 Post-Irradiation Examination (Supp. 33) of Inpile Capsules· Covering 

the Period September 1 - September 30, 1962 Dated 10/17/1962 

CNLM-3450 Post-Irradiation Examination (Supp. 34) of Inpile Capsules Covering 

the Period October 1 - 31, 1962 Dated 11/23/1962 

CNLM-3558 Fuel Elements for Criticality Hazards Experiments Dated 3/28/1961 CNLM-3796 Submitting AEC-22 Form Entitled "Irradiation Services Purchase 

Order" Dated 8/16/1961 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL 

29 of 32

Table A1-3: OSTI DOCUMENTS REQUESTED FOR CANEL 

Document Number Document Title 

CNLM-3797 AEC-22 Form "Irradiation Services Purchase Order Number 609116 

Contract” Dated 8/16/1961 

CNLM-498 Columbium Exposure Test Dated 1/24/1958 CNLM-5070 Core Installation and Assembly Hazards Summary Report for the 

Lithium Cooled Reactor Experiment (LCRE) Dated 6/25/1963 

CNLM-668 Kilograms of Plutonium, Kilograms Contained U235, Kilograms 

Normal Uranium Dated 4/3/1958 

CNLM-777-10 Zirconium - Hydride (Reactor Grade) Dated 11/18/1958 CNLM-777-11 Yttrium - Hydride (Com. Grade) Dated 11/18/1958 CNLM-777-12 Yttrium - Hydride (Reactor Grade) Dated 11/18/1958 CNLM-777-9 Zirconium - Hydride (Com. Grade) Dated 11/18/1958 CNLM-891 Handling Limitations for Mixtures of Uranium, Beryllium, Beryllium 

Oxide and Lithium-7 Dated 7/14/1958 

CNLM-997 Data for Hazards Study-PWAR-12 and PWAR-12C Dated 7/30/1958 FXM-4347 Criticality Hazards Analysis of Uranium Handling Operation 

Proposed in Standard Practice 440-19 Dated 12/9/1959 

FXM-4931 The Selection of the NJ-18A Power-plant Shield Coolant and the 

Determination of its Maximum Allowable Exposure Time to Radiation Dated 4/5/1961 

PWAC-139 Hazards Summary Report on Nuclear Physics Laboratory at CANEL 

Dated 10/10/1955 

PWAC-170 Hazards Summary Report on (Supp. 1) Critical Experiment Program 

Number 1 at CANEL Dated 11/27/1957 

PWAC-170 Hazards Summary Report on Critical Experiment - Program Number 

1 at CANEL Dated 5/31/1957 

PWAC-205 CTF Summary Hazards Report Dated 11/15/1957 PWAC-277 Hazards Summary Report for 10 Mw Reactor Experiment at CANEL 

Dated 7/27/1959 

PWAC-281 Hazards Summary Report on Critical Experiment Program Number 3 

at CANEL Dated 11/2/1959 

PWAC-283 Hazards Summary Report for (Supp. 1) Critical Experiment Program 

Dated 2/3/1961 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL 

30 of 32

Table A1-3: OSTI DOCUMENTS REQUESTED FOR CANEL 

Document Number Document Title 

PWAC-283 Hazards Summary Report on (Supp. 2) Critical Experiment Program 

Number 2 at CANEL 7/24/1961 

PWAC-283 Hazards Summary Report on (Supp. 3) Critical Experiment Program 

Number 2 at CANEL 7/6/1963 

PWAC-283 Hazards Summary Report on (Supp. 3) Critical Experiment Program 

Number 2 at CANEL Dated 10/9/1962 

PWAC-283 Hazards Summary Report on Critical Experiment Program Number 2 

at CANEL Dated 12/30/1959 

PWAC-309 Hazards Summary Report on Critical Experiment Program Number 4 

at CANEL Dated 1/4/1961 

PWAC-314 Preliminary Hazards Report for a Reactor Experiment at CANEL 

Dated 1/23/1961 

PWAC-366 Suitability of Available Uranium (Supp. 10) for Conversion to 

Enriched Uranium Nitride Dated 4/23/1965 

PWAC-435 Feasibility Report for Use of Plutonium-beryllium Neutron Sources at 

the CANEL Nuclear Physics Laboratory Dated 8/5/1964 

PWAC-488 Uranium Nitride Fuel Development - SNAP-50 Dated 10/1/1965 TIM-712 Statistical Evaluation of Revised Methods for Chemical Control of 

Uranium Inventories during Fuel Element Production Dated 4/24/1962 

TIM-712 (Supp 1) Statistical Evaluation of Revised Methods for Chemical Control of 

Uranium Inventories During Fuel Element Production-Sampling Dated 5/17/1962 

TIM-813 A Program to Study the Effects Dated 5/6/1964 TIM-813 A Program to Study the Effects of Neutron Irradiation Upon 

Columbium Base Alloys Dated 3/12/1964 

TIM-813 (Supp 1) TIM-813 A Program to Study the Effects (Supp. 1) of Neutron 

Irradiation Upon (Rev. 1) Columbium Base Alloys Dated 6/18/64 

TIM-814 Proposed SNAP-50 Shield Development Program Dated 5/28/1964 TIM-817 Irradiation and Examination Report of Capsule PW 26-190 Dated 

3/26/1964 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL 

31 of 32

Table A1-3: OSTI DOCUMENTS REQUESTED FOR CANEL 

Document Number Document Title 

DPW-56-241 Visit report, Allegheny Ludlum Steel Corporation on Uranium Tubes 

dated 5/15/1956 

DOE/TIC-85(Rev. 13) Energy information database: report number codes dated 9/1/1979 M-7028 ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY AT CANEL. Summary of Data 

for 1958 dated 3/18/1958 

M-7029 ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY AT CANEL. Summary of Data 

for 1958 dated 3/18/1958 

NMI-4383 POWER REACTOR PROGRAM. Progress Report to E.I. du Pont de 

Nemours and Company for the Period November 1, 1958 through November 30, 1958 dated 2/12/1959 

DPW-6429 ?? A-4044; NNES-VII-2B (Chap. 8) Recovery of Uranium Turnings, Chips and Borings DR-3595 ?? CNLM-2698 U-233 needs forecast 

CNLM-3871 Reactor Program Description of Tasks CNLM-3924 CANEL hot cell facility 

CNLM-4449 General Reactor Technology CNLM-5298 ?? CNLM-5395 Nuclear Propulsion Systems CNLM-5398 ?? 
SEC-00124 08-13-08 FINAL 

32 of 32

Table A1-3: OSTI DOCUMENTS REQUESTED FOR CANEL 

Document Number Document Title 

CNLM-577 facilities descriptions for CANEL CNLM-5998 Criticality Studies CNLM-71 Physics--General CNLM-81 Materials PWAC-153 HAZARDS SUMMARY REPORT ON HIGH FLUX TEST REACTOR 

FOR CANEL 

PWAC-162REV2 Connecticut Aircraft Nuclear Engine Laboratory Current Facilities 

Middletown, Connecticut, Revision No. 2, July 5, 1957 

PWAC-193 CANEL site monitoring program 

PWAC-283SUPPL4 Supplement No. 4 Hazards summary report on Critical Experiment 

Program No. 2 at CANEL, July 11, 1963 

PWAC-283SUPPL6 Materials TIM-149 proposed counting room equipment TIM-936 CANEL MATERIALS LABORATORY MANUAL--ANALYTICAL 

SECTION 

CNLM-5241 Engineering and Equipment